Posted by MikeT23 on 10/26/2011 9:35:00 AM (view original):

Spending time giving these people any recognition is pretty much a waste of time.  I'll start by using this as a base "certain products and services",   Can't really disagree.   However, it seems to me that the OWS people would be minimalists.   And I have no problem at all with that.    I didn't watch much of the video, simply because I assumed he was just making up a scenario and, after about 30 seconds, you know what it is.   But, if there's anyone protesting with a mobile phone or ipad or designer clothing, they should be protesting themselves.   Either you're fine with corporate greed or you're not.   And, if you're not, don't feed it with unnecessary luxuries.  And, if you're against it but supporting them by buying their products, don't start protesting it.

The OWS protesters are not against money, technology, consumerism - they are against corruption that was/is rampant in the financial institutions in this country.  Corruption that led to the economic downturn we are experiencing.  Plus the fact that our elected officials have done nothing to keep it from happening again.

Posted by jiml60 on 10/26/2011 5:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by philogenemay on 10/26/2011 3:06:00 AM (view original):
The predictable reference to Republicans is so off target, it is more pathetic than the usual leftist hypocrisy.

Rep congress: You want us to pass a bill that spends X amt of tax dollars to fund police and fire departments?
Awesome, now what are we cutting so that we can actually be responsible in our budgeting and spending? 

Dems: We will cut nothing! These people are necessary to the safety of our constituents.

Rep congress: Agreed. So, can we find something less important to cut that would allow us to pay for this bill?

Dems to any media outlet: Republicans are against policemen and firemen! They refuse to pass ANYTHING! America can't afford to play politics in this economic climate!

Isn't your last point merely the Dems taking a lesson from the Repubs?  I seem to recall, in the aftermath of 9/11, as the Republicans were preparing to slowly erode our Constitutional rights by ramming the Patriot Act through Congress - if a member of Congress, mostly a Democrat dared to utter a word of protest, there were cries of un-American! You're either with us or against us!

Republicans are just as hypocritical as the Democrats.

I wouldn't say "taking a lesson from", as I really don't know where it really all began.
I would say it was happening long before GW.

I definitely agree with the notion that both are prone to distort the truth in the media.  

Posted by jiml60 on 10/26/2011 5:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/26/2011 9:35:00 AM (view original):

Spending time giving these people any recognition is pretty much a waste of time.  I'll start by using this as a base "certain products and services",   Can't really disagree.   However, it seems to me that the OWS people would be minimalists.   And I have no problem at all with that.    I didn't watch much of the video, simply because I assumed he was just making up a scenario and, after about 30 seconds, you know what it is.   But, if there's anyone protesting with a mobile phone or ipad or designer clothing, they should be protesting themselves.   Either you're fine with corporate greed or you're not.   And, if you're not, don't feed it with unnecessary luxuries.  And, if you're against it but supporting them by buying their products, don't start protesting it.

The OWS protesters are not against money, technology, consumerism - they are against corruption that was/is rampant in the financial institutions in this country.  Corruption that led to the economic downturn we are experiencing.  Plus the fact that our elected officials have done nothing to keep it from happening again.

I think you and I both know that money is the cause of corruption.   And material items cost money.   Buying those UNNECESSARY items only continues and validates the corruption of those money-making institutions. 

You have to start somewhere.  Simply boycotting the items that cause the corruption is a fine start.

Except the companies/corporations that were involved in the corruption do not make any products.  All they do is shuffle numbers around.

This country is built on consumerism, that's not going to change.  What we need is for the government to regulate and start prosecuting the CEOs of these institutions.  Tough love.  Make them live/compete within their means.

They do business with the companies that do.    The more money a business makes, the more corrupt it's likely to become.

If you want to make a statement against corruption in big business, make a statement.   Don't putz around the park for a few weeks.   It's laughable.

Posted by jiml60 on 10/26/2011 5:58:00 PM (view original):
Except the companies/corporations that were involved in the corruption do not make any products.  All they do is shuffle numbers around.

This country is built on consumerism, that's not going to change.  What we need is for the government to regulate and start prosecuting the CEOs of these institutions.  Tough love.  Make them live/compete within their means.

Obama said it himself. Those CEOs did nothing 'illegal'. He can't prosecute them. Its lawmakers that changed the laws to ALLOW those CEOs to 'legally' function the way they did.

I find it interesting that for 50 yrs now we, as a society, have pushed God and morality out of the equation, calling for the notion that the individual should be allowed to live by their own value system. 

When people have no actual basis for morality, obviously greed and corruption will run rampant. What's to stop it?

If their is no standard, then how can we "judge" those who are greedy and corrupt?
If Darwinism is preferred, and actually promoted for a half a century,  over Godly values that the country was founded on, then only the few will survive and prosper. Survival of the fittest right?

As Moy said, these people in many instances have broken no laws.
They are certainly guilty of having little to no morality in my eyes, but I can't impose my belief system on anyone else so, you get what you ask for.
Now the 99% are angry with the people in power for having no moral compass...

Yet 55% of the OWS people did not vote in the 2010 mid-term elections.

So again . . . are they really protesting their own apathy?

Yeah, because obviously if your beef is that both parties are in the pocket of Wall Street/corporate donors, then of course the solution is to vote for one of those parties.  That's how democracy works!

Posted by crazystengel on 10/27/2011 9:32:00 PM (view original):
Yeah, because obviously if your beef is that both parties are in the pocket of Wall Street/corporate donors, then of course the solution is to vote for one of those parties.  That's how democracy works!

There are more than two parties.  Nobody really takes the others seriously because they're generally regarded as fringe, but if these kooks really want to send a message, and do it the right way, they would do it at the polls.

They need to organize politically, and if they truly feel that they represent "the 99%" as they say they do, they should be able to make an impact.

But unless they do, they'll just go down as a footnote in history as the failed hippie movement of 2011.

Posted by jiml60 on 10/27/2011 11:57:00 AM (view original):
Relying on Obama's opinion on the conduct of the corporations/financial institutions that he is beholden to, is about as believable as Dubya telling us Iraq had viable WMDs.

You still need to sell the notion that Dems and Pubs are actually part of a secret Conspiracy to screw the working man.

Can you offer any support for this?

The 2 parties support policies in direct opposition to each other and have passed bills that have helped and hurt Corporations.

Posted by crazystengel on 10/27/2011 9:32:00 PM (view original):
Yeah, because obviously if your beef is that both parties are in the pocket of Wall Street/corporate donors, then of course the solution is to vote for one of those parties.  That's how democracy works!

So the solution is to prance around Wall Street?   55% is a majority.   Write in Jester Hat guy. 

Posted by tecwrg on 10/27/2011 10:39:00 PM (view original):

Posted by crazystengel on 10/27/2011 9:32:00 PM (view original):
Yeah, because obviously if your beef is that both parties are in the pocket of Wall Street/corporate donors, then of course the solution is to vote for one of those parties.  That's how democracy works!

There are more than two parties.  Nobody really takes the others seriously because they're generally regarded as fringe, but if these kooks really want to send a message, and do it the right way, they would do it at the polls.

They need to organize politically, and if they truly feel that they represent "the 99%" as they say they do, they should be able to make an impact.

But unless they do, they'll just go down as a footnote in history as the failed hippie movement of 2011.

Great response

You guys have the reasoning skills of an infant with a fever.  Okay, it's a failed hippie movement.  Scott Olsen is a failed hippie.  Keep watching your Fox News, you 21st century Archie Bunkers.